In 1972, the young philosopher Peter Singer published "Famine, Affluence and Morality," which rapidly became one of the most widely discussed essays in applied ethics. Through this article, Singer presents his view that we have the same moral obligations to those far away as we do to those close to us. He argued that choosing not to send life-saving money to starving people on ...
In 1972, the young philosopher Peter Singer published "Famine, Affluence and Morality," which rapidly became one of the most widely discussed essays in applied ethics. Through this article, Singer presents his view that we have the same moral obligations to those far away as we do to those close to us. He argued that choosing not to send life-saving money to starving people on the other side of the earth is the moral equivalent of neglecting to save drowning children because we prefer not to muddy our shoes. If we can help, we must--and any excuse is hypocrisy. Singer's extreme stand on our moral obligations to others became a powerful call to arms and continues to challenge people's attitudes towards extreme poverty. Today, it remains a central touchstone for those who argue we should all help others more than we do.
As Bill and Melinda Gates observe in their foreword, in the age of today's global philanthropy, Singer's essay is as relevant now as it ever was. This attractively packaged, concise edition collects the original article, two of Singer's more recent popular writings on our obligations to others around the world, and a new introduction by Singer that discusses his current thinking.
作者简介
· · · · · ·
【作者简介】
彼得·辛格（Peter Singer，1946—），生于澳大利亚墨尔本，牛津大学哲学博士，现任普林斯顿大学生物伦理学教授。20 世纪 70 年代凭借《动物解放》一书和《饥饿、富裕与道德》一文声名大噪，前者被誉为“现代动物解放运动圣经”，后者引发学界和大众关于全球贫困的激烈辩论。他是《不列颠百科全书》当前版本中的伦理学主要词条的撰写者，在伦理学领域声誉卓著。他创建了慈善组织“你可以拯救的生命”（The Life You Can Save），积极救助处于极端贫困中的人群。2005 年入选美国《时代》周刊“全球百大影响力人物”，以及澳大利亚《悉尼先驱晨报》“澳大利亚十大影响力公共知识分子”，在“2013年全球思想领袖榜”中位列第三。另著有《为什么成为素食主义者：合乎伦理地饮食》（Why Vegan? Eating Ethically）、《同一...
彼得·辛格（Peter Singer，1946—），生于澳大利亚墨尔本，牛津大学哲学博士，现任普林斯顿大学生物伦理学教授。20 世纪 70 年代凭借《动物解放》一书和《饥饿、富裕与道德》一文声名大噪，前者被誉为“现代动物解放运动圣经”，后者引发学界和大众关于全球贫困的激烈辩论。他是《不列颠百科全书》当前版本中的伦理学主要词条的撰写者，在伦理学领域声誉卓著。他创建了慈善组织“你可以拯救的生命”（The Life You Can Save），积极救助处于极端贫困中的人群。2005 年入选美国《时代》周刊“全球百大影响力人物”，以及澳大利亚《悉尼先驱晨报》“澳大利亚十大影响力公共知识分子”，在“2013年全球思想领袖榜”中位列第三。另著有《为什么成为素食主义者：合乎伦理地饮食》（Why Vegan? Eating Ethically）、《同一个世界：全球化的伦理》（One World Now: the Ethics of Globalization）、《实践伦理学》（Practical Ethics）、《动物权利与人类义务》（Animal Rights and Human Obligations）等。
Sound arguments // a few things to consider: counter arguments to Singer being “a consumer based economy doesn’t hold still under this way of living”, or what’s the scale that we need to sacrifice, or...Sound arguments // a few things to consider: counter arguments to Singer being “a consumer based economy doesn’t hold still under this way of living”, or what’s the scale that we need to sacrifice, or is being “in” the system but giving necessarily superior// still a provocative thought and questions the materialistic way of living (展开)
We have a responsibility to prevent bad things from happening unless in doing so we would be sacrificing something of comparable moral significance. If we don’t do it, then we should at least know tha...We have a responsibility to prevent bad things from happening unless in doing so we would be sacrificing something of comparable moral significance. If we don’t do it, then we should at least know that we are failing to live a morally decent life.(展开)
Sound arguments // a few things to consider: counter arguments to Singer being “a consumer based economy doesn’t hold still under this way of living”, or what’s the scale that we need to sacrifice, or...Sound arguments // a few things to consider: counter arguments to Singer being “a consumer based economy doesn’t hold still under this way of living”, or what’s the scale that we need to sacrifice, or is being “in” the system but giving necessarily superior// still a provocative thought and questions the materialistic way of living (展开)
星尘
中国华侨出版社2021版
幻云锦风
中国华侨出版社2021版
三辉君
中国华侨出版社2021版
0 有用 Blade King 2018-07-31 10:42:00
字大行宽。重点还是第一篇辛格的成名作，基于普遍性与准功利的原理（特别是moderate version）简洁推断。非常有意思的是作者的功利主义达到强有力的援助义务，而不涉及尊严这样的通常道德术语。
0 有用 阿批察邦 2024-03-18 19:58:26 中国香港
牛魔的
3 有用 MoviElliott 2023-01-31 16:36:17 云南
本科哲学课就写了一篇给Singer挑刺的paper，很惭愧。这个理论的简洁性是导致读者们下意识从各个角度去攻击他的主要原因。但简洁并不意味着简单，越是精简的论证便越需要读者长期的实践和反思。蒙上眼睛堵住耳朵再把一切归咎于“理想化”并不是Singer论证本身的错误
0 有用 robbch 2023-03-26 09:18:55 美国
Sound arguments // a few things to consider: counter arguments to Singer being “a consumer based economy doesn’t hold still under this way of living”, or what’s the scale that we need to sacrifice, or... Sound arguments // a few things to consider: counter arguments to Singer being “a consumer based economy doesn’t hold still under this way of living”, or what’s the scale that we need to sacrifice, or is being “in” the system but giving necessarily superior// still a provocative thought and questions the materialistic way of living (展开)
0 有用 SammyRabbit 2021-10-03 10:55:39
We have a responsibility to prevent bad things from happening unless in doing so we would be sacrificing something of comparable moral significance. If we don’t do it, then we should at least know tha... We have a responsibility to prevent bad things from happening unless in doing so we would be sacrificing something of comparable moral significance. If we don’t do it, then we should at least know that we are failing to live a morally decent life. (展开)
0 有用 阿批察邦 2024-03-18 19:58:26 中国香港
牛魔的
0 有用 风飘飘 2023-10-27 11:46:10 中国香港
1. 我认为，将在池塘中救起一名溺水儿童的行为与帮助非洲营养不良儿童的行为直接相提并论是不公平的。这是因为非洲的信息鸿沟可能会阻碍我们看到援助的真实信息和后果。此外，作者也没有考虑到慈善组织内部可能存在的腐败和官僚主义。即使我们捐出 100 美元，实际到达非洲儿童可能只 1 美元。因此，考虑到救助溺水儿童直接实际效果，以及援助非洲工作不确定性，推断出帮助溺水儿童等同于直接帮助非洲人是不恰当的。 2... 1. 我认为，将在池塘中救起一名溺水儿童的行为与帮助非洲营养不良儿童的行为直接相提并论是不公平的。这是因为非洲的信息鸿沟可能会阻碍我们看到援助的真实信息和后果。此外，作者也没有考虑到慈善组织内部可能存在的腐败和官僚主义。即使我们捐出 100 美元，实际到达非洲儿童可能只 1 美元。因此，考虑到救助溺水儿童直接实际效果，以及援助非洲工作不确定性，推断出帮助溺水儿童等同于直接帮助非洲人是不恰当的。 2. 2. 我个人认为，过分赞扬华尔街亿万富翁的财富和慈善事业，可能会抑制普通人参与捐 款的热情。例如，当我把自己有限的捐款能力与华尔街富豪的巨额捐款相比较时，就会打击积极性，自覺捐款微不足道。这种感觉确实会打击我捐款的积极性。重要的是，在肯定慈善工作的同时，要保持平衡，不能无意中削弱普通人的贡献。 (展开)
0 有用 robbch 2023-03-26 09:18:55 美国
Sound arguments // a few things to consider: counter arguments to Singer being “a consumer based economy doesn’t hold still under this way of living”, or what’s the scale that we need to sacrifice, or... Sound arguments // a few things to consider: counter arguments to Singer being “a consumer based economy doesn’t hold still under this way of living”, or what’s the scale that we need to sacrifice, or is being “in” the system but giving necessarily superior// still a provocative thought and questions the materialistic way of living (展开)
3 有用 MoviElliott 2023-01-31 16:36:17 云南
本科哲学课就写了一篇给Singer挑刺的paper，很惭愧。这个理论的简洁性是导致读者们下意识从各个角度去攻击他的主要原因。但简洁并不意味着简单，越是精简的论证便越需要读者长期的实践和反思。蒙上眼睛堵住耳朵再把一切归咎于“理想化”并不是Singer论证本身的错误
0 有用 大胆星人（40Λ 2022-06-27 13:11:36
去年读的必修，今年有幸听作者本人的讲座，来补个分